Skip to comments.
Pro-Homosexual Study Authored by Lesbian
Agape Press ^
| February 9, 2005
| AFA Journal
Posted on 02/15/2005 12:47:58 PM PST by DBeers
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
To: DBeers
Patterson is naught but a pseudo-scientist who begins with a lie, wraps it in a less than half-truth, enlarges it with hyperbole and counteroffensive accusations cloaked in the chiding tones of sneering elitist scholarly dismissal.
The colossal arrogance of people so enamoured of their own (fools) wisdom just amazes and affronts me. Sodom and Gomorrah were obliterated for far less than such behaviour as these deviants practise today.
Nineveh was guilty of similar wickedness, but when Jonah, skin bleached by the digestive juices of the whale's belly, crawled ashore and preached repentence, the largest revival of the Bible occured. Every person of that reprobate city from King to stable boy was stung by their conscience and humbled themselves in sackcloth and ashes, ashamed for their great evil. God spared them in His mercy, seeing the contrition of their hearts.
These folk today are so hard-hearted and stiff-necked, that they are mostly unreachable, having become godlike in their own minds. It is not enough for them to still dissenting voices, now they seek the outright endorsement of social and political establishments. Woe be unto them! And to many of us who quietly 'tolerate' their creeping agenda.
21
posted on
02/15/2005 1:22:33 PM PST
by
AmericanArchConservative
(Armour on, Lances high, Swords out, Bows drawn, Shields front ... Eagles UP!)
To: EdReform; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; Yakboy; I_Love_My_Husband; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
If you want on/off the ping list see my profile page.
22
posted on
02/15/2005 1:25:41 PM PST
by
DirtyHarryY2K
(''Go though life with a Bible in one hand and a Newspaper in the other" -- Billy Graham)
To: DBeers
Let the Internet now once again ferociously debunk yet another liberal fraud.
23
posted on
02/15/2005 1:26:38 PM PST
by
FormerACLUmember
(Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
To: DBeers
There seems to be a pattern in the Lesbian community.
A number of them are in the field of Psychiatry. They therefore are in a position of authority when counseling other women. Perhaps a Psychiatrist's office is a good place for them to get hooked up.
To: DBeers
25
posted on
02/15/2005 1:36:49 PM PST
by
EdReform
(Free Republic - helping to keep our country a free republic. Thank you for your financial support!)
To: DBeers; scripter; Clint N. Suhks; ArGee; lentulusgracchus; Mockingbird For Short; SweetCaroline; ...
26
posted on
02/15/2005 1:41:11 PM PST
by
EdReform
(Free Republic - helping to keep our country a free republic. Thank you for your financial support!)
To: Publius Scipio
Publius Scipio states:
"I believe the point is that this study was, presumably, accompanied by some evidence to support it's conclusion and that it might be more useful to examine that evidence than to make ad hominem assertions of bias."
The article posted states:
"...co-authored a study which claimed that the children of lesbian couples are as happy and well-adjusted as children living in traditional homes."
Publius Scipio: Evidence supporting the above conjecture is obviously of a subjective nature, and therefore its entirely appropriate of anyone to be questioning the source of such data. This is empirical data, nothing more, nothing less. I can think of no better way to examine data based on opinion and observation than to examine the authors of such a study. I think you're just hiding behind your PC tinted lens ignoring the obvious.
If this were the Olympics and not homosexuals, and the W. German judge gave the W. German team a perfect 10 in figure skating not child rearing would it be easier for you to join in the discussion instead of attacking those of us who are? Could you then question the motives of the...W German judges?
No one get me wrong, i have no bone ;) in this pro-gay/anti-gay debate, but don't try and snowball ;) me into believing that this is an attack on homosexuality by a bunch of "homophobes" and not an attack on a blatantly bias study.
Thats another one that gets me. Is there such a thing as Homophobes? I think it could be yet another trick of the left to shame people into accepting something they don't want to.
It seems to me that it would pretty hard to prove that someone hates homosexuals because they themselves are in fact gay yet not willing to admit it. Is there some group of gay men out there that used to be afraid of other gay men until they realized, "Hey I'm afraid of them because they're just like me".
Yup that holds water.
27
posted on
02/15/2005 1:42:13 PM PST
by
ReeseKev27
(Liberalism = Idealism; Conservative = Realism - I'd rather deal in the real world)
To: DBeers
However, Glover did some research of his own, and discovered that Patterson is a lesbian in a relationship with a female partner, and the couple has three children between them. .....Oh yea, lets let the mentally retarded critic themselves too!!!!
Hey, they wouldn't be bias either!!!!
....and we would believe them too!
NOT
28
posted on
02/15/2005 1:43:10 PM PST
by
SweetCaroline
(My soul wait thou only upon GOD, for my expectation is from him. Psalm 62:5)
To: EdReform
To: C210N
"...who is funding these studies..."
all too often--MY/YOUR TAX DOLLARS!!!!
To: ReeseKev27
Evidence supporting the above conjecture is obviously of a subjective nature, and therefore its entirely appropriate of anyone to be questioning the source of such data. How would you know, if you haven't seen it? You can't discredit this study without discrediting the evidence and methodology.
Waving your arms around and making claims of "obviously" subjective evidence doesn't make it so. This isn't about being PC. I'm far from it. It's about intellectually honest debate.
Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap. A pro-family advocate claiming a pro-homo advocate is guilty of bias might be mildly comical in it's unintentional irony, but it does absolutely nothing to disprove the homosexual's conclusions.
To: DBeers; NYer
Shazam!
Surprise surprise surprise!
32
posted on
02/15/2005 2:38:05 PM PST
by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: Publius Scipio
Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap. A pro-family advocate claiming a pro-homo advocate is guilty of bias might be mildly comical in it's unintentional irony, but it does absolutely nothing to disprove the homosexual's conclusions. You don't have to be the head cashier at Wal-mart to figure out that two homosexuals for parents are not in the best interest of a child.
No child should have to sacrifice their natural right to have a father and a mother just to satisfy two selfish perverts that place their perverted sexual preferences higher on the priority list than the spiritual and emotional needs of the child.
33
posted on
02/15/2005 2:42:50 PM PST
by
DirtyHarryY2K
(''Go though life with a Bible in one hand and a Newspaper in the other" -- Billy Graham)
To: Publius Scipio
"How would you know, if you haven't seen it? You can't discredit this study without discrediting the evidence and methodology."
This is long.
I completely disagree, facts can be assembled to prove just about anything, relying on what the author decides to include is at best working half blind. There have been books written using "scientific" data that disprove Jews were gassed in Germany. The conclusion is wrong, yet they present data that says else wise. How is this possible? misrepresentation of the facts thats how.
For the sake of debate lets disregard my belief that this report is worthless before even opening it because of the authors UNDISCLOSED bias which really ends the argument.
Both terms,'happy' and 'well-adjusted', are subjective terms (i.e. open to interpretation). We can go around in circle debating what "happy" is. Supposedly there are people out there that are, "happy" to live in totalitarian regimes headed by ruthless dictators.
Some people don't want democracy or freedom when given the choice. The left has pedaled this for the past 3 or 4 decades. Whole books have been written about these mythical places, and yet if someone else visited these places, they might just find they value the freedom of speech, or the freedom to bear arms, or the checks and balances inherent in a Representative government. Cuba and Fidel are their poster children, and yet who's coming to who's country? When "the wall" fell in Germany, which way were the people running? Was it East or West?
In other words the "data" used to conclude that someone is, "well adjusted" or "happy" is, and will always be, open to debate BECUASE of its subjective nature.
Secondly, the evidence and methodology isn't as important as you'd like to make it. Its secondary in nature. Why? Because it's her study, she wrote it, she decided what evidence to use, and more importantly she decided what evidence not to use.
She is a lesbian, (not telling you she's a lesbian)making a study to say its okay for homosexuals (her) to have children. Low and behold she (a homosexual) has children. Tell me, are you going to argue that there was even a chance she'd come up with a different conclusion? I dare you to even argue that she didn't go into this study with her conclusion already written.
She could have 100 pages of "proof" and yet it doesn't matter because she didn't tell anyone she was gay and that is really all that needs to be said.
34
posted on
02/15/2005 2:43:58 PM PST
by
ReeseKev27
(Liberalism = Idealism; Conservative = Realism - I'd rather deal in the real world)
To: Publius Scipio
Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap LOL -welcome to FR we have alot of worthless crap here -the dems hate it and call it worthless crap!
35
posted on
02/15/2005 2:47:57 PM PST
by
DBeers
To: ReeseKev27
There have been books written using "scientific" data that disprove Jews were gassed in Germany. The conclusion is wrong, yet they present data that says else wise.Yes, and those books have been thoroughly discredited by deconstructing the evidence that was presented in them not by complaints of bias.
Attack the evidence not the author. That's all I'm trying to say.
To: DBeers
Manipulation of laws is what family law lawyers specializing in homosexuals adopting children do.
For example, they will have ONE adopt the child then the sex partner is granted the adoption.
27 states eith FORBID or restrict such adoptions.
Does anyone have a link to the new zeland study which was more comprehensive?
To: All
THESE ARE THE GUIDES FOR CIRCUMVENTING THE LAW IN ORDER TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO CHILDREN...
Homosexuals are competing with normal couples for the same babies.
http://www.glad.org/rights/parenting.shtml
If anyone can store these documents, they are a source of such gaming the law for all to know.
To: longtermmemmory
To: E Rocc
Well said. I don't care if she's a Hooverheifer--if the methodology is sound, the study will be.
Now, odds are pretty good it's lousy study (since 99% of the sociological studies out are done by and for liberals), but I'd prefer to see the methodology to confirm it.
40
posted on
02/15/2005 7:26:41 PM PST
by
LibertarianInExile
(NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson